Make everything 'Free': A Voluntegalitarian System (utopia)

Originally posted by Shuye
reply to post by filledcup

 

As much as I LOVE the idea you were sharing, which sounds completely natural to me I must say, the change humanity really needs is a change of consciousness, rather than a change in system. A change in a system prior to a change of one's consciousness will be doomed to fail.

Currently most of humanity is driven by capitalistic values so it's quite typical (unfortunately) to hear opinions such as "ok so I want my bentley, ferrari and porsche in my new mansion ASAP" because they haven't evolved themselves into the principles of oneness and got rid of their desires for bodily and materialistic satisfaction.

This Utopian world would be GREAT, if humanity have already evolved to the point people are ready to downgrade themselves for the sake of all. Sadly people are too greedy, too needy, and too much self-concentrated and self-important to be in such a world and roll on.

Sadly, most of humanity isn't more evolved from our other brothers and sisters, the primates. Most of humanity are still somewhere in between, they look like human and can talk, express, evolve ideas and so on, but they are really driven by the same principles of apes, which is alpha-maleism, survival of the fittest, kill whatever is in your way and take whatever you need regardless of others.

For a real humanity, this world you are talking about would be great, and it's probably an ideal one for many of us. But when and if we'll try to welcome everyone to the voluntarism idea, i'm afraid it won't work since most people are still willing to take from more than to give to. And this principle is what holds us back the most imo.

Sorry that my poor belief in humanity ideas, I can't say i'm favoring our specie too much lately, but S&F for a great thread, know that you are not the only dreamer here.

edit on 27-8-2013 by Shuye because: (no reason given)

I hear you but I think it's more about nurture (culture) than it is about nature. It seems to be popular conviction humans are greedy, needy and selfish. Frans de Waal argues that's not true, I think he is right.

Alpha. That word is misused. The alpha wolf for example has been shown to be untrue:

io9.com...

Cavemen didn't have a alpha. Leaders were picked from time to time depending on what had to be done (I've read).

How you talk about primates, you clearly understand few. For one you can't generalize all primates. Orangutans are mostly solitary. Chimpanzees hunt. Bonobos are into all kinds of sex.

It's also not that negative as you describe. Survival of the fittest? Sure, but the dominant males get killed occasionaly in power disputes. Alpha-maleism? That's true until proven otherwise. Kill whatever is in your way? No primates don't do that, but chimps, and only chimps, do wage war. Take whatever you need regardless of others. Frans de Waals says not, he's a respected primatologist. It is true however high ranking primates get more access to food.

Now I'm not a expert on everything either, but I don't like convictions.

I get what you are trying to say. But you are basically pointing fingers and creating a group.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________

Why do we need a system anyway? Why not start with a lifestyle first? Start a counter-culture that slowly swallows everything in it's path.

reply to post by filledcup


there are plenty of systems that would work ..... unfortunately they never work because people always pervert it.

I see what you are saying but the same problems that exists in a system today will exist in any system you can come up with.

keeping it honest is impossible

In many years I've been fascinated by the idea, that people could make a civilization without being greedy and egoistic etc. Marxism would be the ideal answer for a world without capitalism, however it have been tried with horrible outcome such as Stalinism (Communism), Leninism and Maoism. The idea is great, but unfortunately it always have the same outcome; the dictators in charges want more power and wealth. So the citizens are "left for death". My point is: we can't change the way the politicians in power thinks or the citizens for that matter. Someone will cheat the system and when that happens the system will be broke. Its a lovely thought, but its unfortunately an utopia.

reply to post by filledcup


There is a great socio-economic system out there that is similar but not exactly like yours. Instead of using "labor" as "money" the economy is based upon "energy credits." You would have the basic needs met and you would serve a certain "function" but after that, any extra energy you put into society you would get that energy back in return. And since energy is a constant you wouldn't have price fluctuations like we have in our current system. It's really neat. It's been around since the 30's and it's called Technocracy. Thanx for putting forth your ideas and I hope you find some stuff in Technocracy that you enjoy. Cheers!

reply to post by filledcup


It is a Wonderful Idea but sadly won't work. If everything is Free then who will produce new items? If you can't gain anything from mass producing say Cars, Clothes, Gadgets ect. then nobody will continue to make them. There will not be many people inventing anything because they have no incentive to. As for food there will be a fight over who gets what, who gets the seeds, animals, land ect. Like I said it's a wonderful idea & can work in a small community but not on a large scale.

“There's no such thing as a free lunch”, or so the saying goes.

It may sound like a great idea in some hippie commune, and as a concept it is fine, but it would never work. It would fail because people with skills have a price and if there is a price then it is not free. What some people in this thread are trying to do is eliminate money, but money is merely an expression of value.

A person who has spent years training to be a doctor may be worth three times more than (say) a plumber. Whether you quantify the “worth” in hours worked and owed, chickens or a pound note is irrelevant, the fact you have attributed value means that it is not free.

Even the most obsessive hippie commune would have attributed value to an activity. Who cleans the toilet?

In a world where everything is free, everyone will starve in quick order.

Regards

reply to post by ForbiddenDesire


Thanks for correcting me.

I clearly don't know enough to categorize primates, I guess I was been fed with some wrong or generalized information, and that info was stuck in my head ever since. Not anymore.

I'm quite aware that this is more a nurture than nature idea, greed and lust for power (neurotically speaking) and the worship of materialistic goods are definitely nurtured, but now it's embedded so strong in our society it would take a few generation perhaps for such change we are discussing here to come in place I believe.

Let's see if we can take out all TV's first haha, that would be a good start.

If money was eliminated I think most of the jobs of today would be eliminated. Obviously banking would be gone. The stock market and what have you would be gone. All the green energy would become the norm because of no need of profit or oil companies losing profit. I think people that depend on the government or welfare will either smarten up or go by the way side. I think the transition will be harsh on some but then people will be motivated to do things for themselves. There would be no need to get up at the crack of dawn. Sit in a car in rush hour. Insane time limits to get things down because now it doesn't cost money to go over time. The treadmill will be gone. I think most of us if not all settle for what we have because it is what we can afford.
The barter system would have to be in place. I have no clue how to manufacture an engine or make tires. I would have to trade some of my skills to get things like a motorcycle .There would be huge growing pains. The star trek idea is cool but we are missing some vital point that will make it work but what that is who knows. Something for the collective but not the borg

reply to post by filledcup


It sounds like you're on the right track, but honestly your system is going to need a lot more thought. Of course at some point you're going to have to admit to yourself that such a system would require a certain amount of forced labor. I personally don't have a problem with that aspect since the removal of currency is going to create a need for a different way of punishing people within the justice system.

Without fines and restitution the only way to reasonably punish someone for a minor offense would be to force them to do the jobs no one wants to do.

Another reason I don't have a problem with forced labor is because millions of Americans are sitting on their butts right now collecting checks and vouchers without contributing anything in return. So if saying I want to force these people to work makes me a commie, then every right wing Republican in this country is a closet case commie as well.

Removing the financial sector would greatly reduce the amount of physical labor our society would require of it's individuals, allowing a standard retirement age of around 50 with about a 3 day work week.

A volunteer work force wouldn't work across the board. What if I decide I really want to volunteer as a doctor but I suck at it?

Just some things for you to consider.

i will catch up on the fullness of the thread soon. what i will say is that i have solutions for most of your concerns.

the disabled and elderly, the reformation of various sectors what will no longer be needed, dealing with skill or labour shortages, the concerns of amassing political power, as well as motivational, cultural and psychological changes that would need to be learned to the masses to adopt and understand the change and the part they will play in it.

i will try to address these concerns in one post later on. for now i will continue to observe the thread and ponder on those items which appear to present challenging problems.

i would also like to throw out a philosophical question into the discussion of the thread.

what if this was the New World Order that was being planned to be instituted? and who's machine works are in the process of development as we speak around the world?

I want to be a Pope of a religion oh wait I am...


Some people have a problem with authority what about those people or the people that are incapable of working
or the psychopaths that are employed right now under a system of compassion they would all be out of work.

Considering Murder and theft are wrong and some people REALLY enjoy those two things how are they still employed even under our current system?

Oh that's right their friends are the ones employing them.


This sounds exactly like the present system we are in but instead of paper money you can't eat you could eat your money in the new system


There would also be a SEVERE lack of medical professionals and Workers working difficult jobs.

Really who enjoys cleaning sewers? I suppose there would be some but I don't think paying them with food and novelties in a paradygm shifted society where compassion is key and the advancement of our race is paramount.


there are too many contradictions for it to work UNLESS we made actual robots capable of all tasks humans can preform and gain pleasure from a job well done.



in any case Slavery is alive and well today and no I am not talking about debt slaves i'm talking about actual slavery where people are in bondage either to work or sex unwittingly.


You could not pay me enough money or food or gadgets or items to make me do ANYTHING
At all ever no matter what it is even something I want to do as soon as there is some kind of inclination of Authority I freak out and want to burn everything to the ground including those people.



This is why I am not allowed to work
Or seek medical help

Employers and Doctors are afraid of what I am capable of because I classified as a free thinking human and not a debt slave yes that is correct I am not in debt to anyone in-fact I charge Government and corporations 1000 ounces of silver and 1000 ounces of Gold to begin interaction then a further 1000 ounces of each every hour
A-lot more than a-lot of people demand as their fee for interaction.

Ever told a judge you don't recognize their court? try it some time.


www.youtube.com...



Since 25th December 2012 : All the World banks, Corporate Governments and United Nations have been foreclosed under law.
It has been Ratified.

UPU is the only Corporation brought into being by Treaty.

it's funny, this is exactly the system every single other organism on the planet operates in, except for homo sapiens..

why?

because everything is free to begin with, it's only when a person wrongfully claims absolute ownership of it, "my car, my house, my clothes, my food, my planet etc", that any "economic" value is placed on it..

everybody owns everything already, collectively.. all individual humans do is say, "i got this, so if you try to take it from me i want some kind of compensation".. this is wrong.. if something is taken from you it's because it didn't belong to only you..

monkeys know how to share, so do apes, just not this specific branch of them, because they mistakenly think they rule the world..

the removal of money is not necessarily what needs to happen, rather a readjustment of it's influence.. some things have no business being "monetarily valued" in any way, for others it's fine..

So basically, you are suggesting socialism, but calling it something else? Conversely you also mention working why you wait to get it, which is kind of what capitalism is. I am very confused.

Originally posted by Marid Audran
So basically, you are suggesting socialism, but calling it something else? Conversely you also mention working why you wait to get it, which is kind of what capitalism is. I am very confused.

ok well what i have done is taken the positive attributes out of various systems past and present including capitalism and attempted to combine those attributes into one system. the negative attributes of each system are countered by the positive attributes of another as each system has it's unique set of flaws which do not occur in other systems. so the attributes which counter negative aspects of a particular system are also taken forward.

an upgrade.. bug fixing.. version 2 for a new generation with a new mindset.

going from adnroid jellybean to android premium steak

Originally posted by Marid Audran
So basically, you are suggesting socialism, but calling it something else? Conversely you also mention working why you wait to get it, which is kind of what capitalism is. I am very confused.

socialism wants all commodities to be "equally" distributed by government, capitalism wants all commodities to be worked for and "monetarily earned" by the population..

what the op is suggesting is neither, as far as i can tell..

Originally posted by tachyonmind
it's funny, this is exactly the system every single other organism on the planet operates in, except for homo sapiens..

Thats a bit idealistic.
In the real world, animals fight, sometimes to the death, over food, nesting sites, women, etc...
A list of animals "things to own" does very much exist, and not in an infinite supply.

Originally posted by alfa1

Originally posted by tachyonmind
it's funny, this is exactly the system every single other organism on the planet operates in, except for homo sapiens..

Thats a bit idealistic.
In the real world, animals fight, sometimes to the death, over food, nesting sites, women, etc...
A list of animals "things to own" does very much exist, and not in an infinite supply.

in the real world, animals only fight over what they need to survive.. the advantage humans have over other animals is that they no longer need to fight for it.. they only fight over who has enough of it, and who deserves to have it..

no animal has a list of "things to own", including humans.. they have a list of "things they need to survive", but outside of that, it's just selfish greed..

"don't these talking monkeys know that eden has enough to go around?" -james keenan

From the 2011 film Zeitgeist Moving Forward


Peter Joseph:
Quite simply, Mechanization is more productive efficient and sustainable than human labor in virtually every sector of the economy today. Machines do not need vacations, breaks, insurance, pensions, and they can work 24 hours a day every day. The output potential and accuracy compared to human labor, is unmatched. The bottom line: repetitive human labor is becoming obsolete and impractical across the world. And the unemployment you see around you today is fundamentally the result of this evolution of efficiency in technology. For years, market economists have dismissed this growing pattern which could be called “Technological Unemployment” because of the fact that new sectors always seemed to emerge to re-absorb the displaced workers. Today, the service sector is the only real hub left and currently employs over 80% of the American workforce with most industrialized countries maintaining a similar proportion. However, this sector now being challenged increasingly by automated kiosks, automated restaurants, and even automated stores. Economists today are finally acknowledging what they had been denying for years: Not only is technological unemployment exasperating the current labor crisis we see across the world due to the global economic downturn, but the more the recession deepens the faster the industries are mechanizing.

The catch, which is not realized, is that the faster they mechanize to save money, the more they displace people - the more they reduce public purchasing power. This means that, while the corporation can produce everything more cheaply, fewer and fewer people will actually have money to buy anything regardless of how cheap they become. The bottom line is that the “labor for income” game is slowly coming to an end. In fact, if you take a moment to reflect on the jobs which are in existence today which automation could take over right now if applied, 75% of the global workforce could be replaced by mechanization tomorrow.

And this is why, in a Resource-Based Economy, there is no Monetary-Market system. No money at all, for there is no need. A Resource-Based Economy recognizes the efficiency of mechanization and accepts it for what it offers. It doesn't fight it, like we do today. Why? Because it is irresponsible not to, given any interest in efficiency and sustainability.

Originally posted by WeepingWill
Marxism would be the ideal answer for a world without capitalism, however it have been tried with horrible outcome such as Stalinism (Communism), Leninism and Maoism. The idea is great, but unfortunately it always have the same outcome; the dictators in charges want more power and wealth.

On a sidenote: don't make the mistake of thinking that the former CCCP was a communist state. It was simply yet another kingdom. To reach the enlightened state of anarchy, we must travel this course:

Chaos -- Kings -- Democracy -- Socialism -- Communism -- Anarchy

Currently, even the most advanced societies aren't even democracies, at best the population is allowed to choose one out of a very select number of self-proclaimed Kings. So, on a scale from 0 to 5 we're at 1,5 at best, IMO.

Maoism and Stalinism are simply incarnations of the "Kings" phase: there is a King or somebody that acts like one that dictates everything. Note that it is still a full 2 steps away from even communism. let alone anarchy.

Also note that the Sovjet Union was not a Communist state, it was trying to be a Socialist state (Союз Советских Социалистических Республик - Soyuz Sovetskikh Sotsialisticheskikh Respublik.). It rose by killing its King (the Czar) and then became what it feared most: a Kingdom again. And not a benevolent one, for that. And even modern Russia is ruled by King Putin, who really believes, like the Czar did, that his rule is wise and good. He is a King, nevertheless.